Dining while blindfolded: A new way to enjoy eating out?

by Jamie Rhein on

For chefs who pride themselves on the artful presentation of their culinary artistry, and people who enjoy looking at their food, probably blindfolded dining is not for them. For anyone who is into a culinary adventure that taps into all other senses but sight, head to the Grill Room restaurant at the Sheraton Hotel in Edinburgh, Scotland. Since October, diners have been able to experience this more unusual way to enjoy their food.

According to executive chef Malcom Webster, dining while blindfolded gives diners the chance to fully experience the various textures, flavors and aromas of the five-course meal. With each course, a new wine is served to further heighten the experience. During the entire time, diners don’t know what they are eating. I do wonder if someone stands by to coach a person who is having a hard time directing his or her fork.

“No, a little to the left sir. There you go. Nope, smaller bite. That’s it. No, your mouth is a little more to the right.”

Recognizing that there are hazards to such an experience, coffee is not part of the meal. I’d add that I’d avoid wearing white. Think of red wine. Even with my sight, I once knocked over a glass of red wine in an upscale restaurant in Albuquerque, sloshing it onto the plate glass window.

This dining experience costs £60 per person. If having someone blindfold you gives you the willies, you can try dining in the dark at Dans Le Noir in London. There the whole dining room is dark. How do the waiters see to bring the food, I wonder? “Ooops, sorry Ma’m.”

As you can see from the picture taken by curran.kelleher, you can turn any dining experience into a blindfolded one. This one was at some event in Rüdesheim, Germany. [www.tandorimagazine.com]

What is a “dangerous” travel destination?

by Brenda Yun on

I’ve been thinking long and hard about what it means to travel to a “dangerous” destination lately because I’m in the process of planning a 2-month trip to Cuba. While Cuba is not considered “dangerous” to citizens of other countries, it does send a little shiver up an American’s spine when thinking about the potential consequences of traveling there without a visa, which I might end up doing. I guess sneaking into Cuba through Mexico or Canada may classify more as “risky” rather than “dangerous,” but I am always willing to take risks so long as I know I will not inevitably put myself in danger. A possible $10,000 fine is quite a price to pay for a visit to a country closed to Americans, however, so I know it’s important to tread lightly.

So I proceeded to do some research on how to estimate a “dangerous” place in the world, and I found the results quite startling. According to Fabiola Hernandez over at Associated Content, the 5 most dangerous countries in the world are Colombia, South Africa, Jamaica, Venezuela, and Russia. Hernandez goes so far to say that, “You wouldn’t want to be caught dead living there, literally.” But do I trust her opinion? Not at all.
This list was generated from a kind-of-handy statistical website called NationMaster.com that spits out national information ranging from Agriculture to Terrorism. Hernandez seemed quick to compile her list by searching for “Crime — Murder per capita.” The “most recent” results of my search are the same as the results Hernandez found nearly two years ago, which leads me to believe NationMaster.com is not at all up-to-date and, therefore, its information is misleading.

I could not disagree more with Hernandez’s list. First, it is completely void of volatile countries in the Middle East. Secondly, I traveled in Colombia, the country at the top of her list, for three months during the spring of 2008 and never felt safer there. Medellín, Colombia’s second largest city that Pablo Escobar made famous, is largely misunderstood. While it may have been the “Murder Capital of the World” five short years ago, this city is quite safe, quite lovely, and quite a tourist hotspot.

I have never been to the other four nations on the list. While I’ve heard that these countries do indeed have their dangerous regions and cities, I know for a fact that there are also some really wonderful, worthwhile places within their borders that it would be a pity if fear prevented a traveler from going there.

I find Hernandez’s estimation of “danger” quite askew, and I feel lists like this are harmful and largely misinterpreted. Sure, the percentage of murders in a country is one thing that could make a place dangerous, but what about terrorism, civil war, theft, and rape? More importantly, fear is the thing that prevents so many travelers from leaving the “safety” of their home. I believe, with proper precautions, even the most dangerous place is just as safe as sitting on your couch. Additionally, you are seeing the world and experiencing life for real, in its rawest, most natural form.

Amtrak photo contest participant arrested by Amtrak police

by Aaron Hotfelder on

When photographer Duane Kerzic first heard about Amtrak’s “Picture our Trains” photo contest, he never imagined that Amtrak police at New York’s Penn Station would confuse his picture-taking for suspicious activity and arrest him. Amtrak’s police and marketing department have to communicate better than that, don’t they?

Well, we already know the answer to that. Kerzic was charged with trespassing after refusing to delete the photos of the trains from his camera.

Kerzic, the alleged victim of all this, is not taking this incident lying down. On his blog, he’s encouraging people to write to their Mayors, Senators, the CEO of Amtrak, and even the President to help make sure this doesn’t happen again. Kerzic has also composed a detailed account of his arrest called (really) “Amtrak Police Intentionally Injure My Right Wrist” and he says he’d like criminal charges to be filed against the arresting officer.

Don’t hold your breath, Duane.

For more on this incident, go here. For photos of Kerzic’s injured wrist, go to (where else) his blog.

Aisle theater seats may cost more money

by Jamie Rhein on

Taking a cue from airlines like Northwest and US Airways that charge more for certain aisle and exit seats to increase revenue, some performing arts theaters are doing the same. According to this AP article, some theaters have found patrons willing to cough up as much as an extra $25 to sit in an aisle seat.

Although I can see that the extra cash comes in handy for the theatrical companies who are finding ways to make ends meet, there’s a certain aspect of this practice that I find annoying. When you buy theater tickets you already pay according to where you would like to sit–orchestra seats as opposed to the balcony, for example. And just because you’ve paid for an orchestra seat, doesn’t mean your seat is all that great.

Sometimes you could have seen better in the balcony depending on who is sitting in front of you. If there is a tall person with big hair, for example–or a person who can’t quite decide which way to lean, there you are struggling to see the stage. All that money you paid for a “good” ticket may not seem worth it by the middle of Act II.

If the theater is really looking to make money and to make seating more fair why not charge tall people more? Also, consider this. If there is a heavier person sitting in the middle because he or she can’t afford the $25 for an aisle seat, what does that do to the comfort of the other theater-goers around him or her?

Charging more for seats that are already a hefty price for most people seems elitist to me and not particularly fair. It seems like instead of drawing people to the theater, it’s one more way to detract some people from coming, i.e., older people with arthritis, people who have mobility problems, heavy people and people with long legs.

Although, on the other hand, if there are aisle seats that are available for people who actually need them because of size or some other physical condition, that seems fair. I would hate to think that some people are kept away from the theater because a physical issue that makes them and everyone else too uncomfortable unless they are able to pay extra to alleviate the problem.

Think that’s weird? Then check out these weird hotels and learn what “weird” really is!

New train travel between New York and Atlantic City

by Jamie Rhein on

After my summer Amtrak trip between Cleveland and New York City, I became a train fan. I couldn’t find one negative thing to say about it except that train travel is elusive to many because of the schedule and the fact there just aren’t that many train routes.

There is another train route to start on February 9 which should make some folks happy. The Atlantic City Express Service (ACES) will take people between Penn Station to Atlantic City, NJ for $50 round-trip in coach class. If you want a jazzier ride, pay $75 for first class. As a bonus aspect of the service, it also includes shuttle service to three different casinos: Bogata Hotel Casino & Spa, Caesars Atlantic City and Harrah’s Resort. These ticket prices are introductory, so if you don’t go soon, you’ll be paying more.

This rail project has been in the works for awhile, and according to the USA Today article from 2007, the casinos are footing the bill. Part of the motivation behind the new service is to entice younger New Yorkers (20 to 30 year-olds) to head to Atlantic City. For these folks, the bus wasn’t cutting it.

Depending upon your gambling habits, this could be a great day trip during the grey, sloshy months of winter when a bit of glitter and glitz could add a pick-me up to an otherwise gloomy feeling afternoon–or add a night or two for a fun weekend.